Monthly Archives: September 2021

Nobody would ever confuse Boston with a Republican stronghold; the city hasnt elected a GOP mayor since the 1920s, and these days the party almost never bothers even to run a candidate in mayoral or city council elections. This year, all five major candidates are Democrats.

Still, almost half of Bostons voters backed Republican Charlie Baker for governor in 2018. Even Donald Trump won 45,000 votes in the city, about 15 percent of the electorate, with clusters of support in South Dorchester, West Roxbury, and South Boston.

With this years preliminary mayoral campaign entering its final days, and polls predicting an extremely close race, those numbers loom large. Boston might not have enough Republicans or Republican-leaning voters to actually elect a mayor but its still a rich, often-overlooked trove of votes that could help boost one of those Democrats.

Openly courting Republican votes, of course, carries risk, since it could antagonize far more numerous Democrats. But Republicans are choosing sides, in ways that reflect their own divisions.

Jennifer Nassour, the former chairwoman of the Massachusetts Republican Party and former Boston City Council candidate, is a self-described social progressive who supports abortion rights and gay marriage. Nassour believes many voters in the city who identify as Republicans are unenrolled, a group that makes up 45 percent of registered voters. Yet, she said, it always seems like issues are skewed all the way to the left. But we [Republicans] are here, and we have issues that are important to us that arent political . . . . Its quality-of-life issues. You cannot put a political party on quality of life.

Nassour is openly supporting Andrea Campbell for mayor. As for how her Republican fellows will vote, she said that she encourages them, [E]ven if you cant get a candidate who is exactly like you in all policies, its important to find a candidate who represents the character of the person youd like to see in office.

Nassour said she has hosted virtual house parties with her friends, who are probably unenrolled and lean more right-of-center, she said. I think their interests in the city are education, housing, making sure that our roads are safe, that our streets are safe, making sure that quality of life is good.

But not every GOP voter would fit in at one of Nassours house parties. Perhaps the most passionate, or at least the most identifiable, shade of Republican voter is the Trump supporter. Consider one of the superPACs backing councilor Annissa Essaibi George, Real Progress Boston, which is led by former Boston Police commissioner William Gross. Its top donors: police unions and Jim Davis, the New Balance chairman who donated almost $400,000 to Trump in 2016. This week, Essaibi George sought to distance herself from the PAC, telling the Dorchester Reporter that shes not happy about the PACs ties to Trump.

Then theres the perennial candidate for mayor in the city, Robert Cappucci, who also made Tuesdays ballot. The last time Cappucci ran, in 2017, he drew nearly 7 percent of votes, or roughly 3,700. The retired Boston police officer and former elected school committee member is a conservative Democrat, but his positions may be more aligned with those of a Republican voter: He is antiabortion and also against sanctuary cities.

Cappucci may very well earn the vote of Trump supporters in Boston. But those voters may not represent the traditional Republican view.

I think that most Republicans like myself who happen to be super invested in the city are going to vote for a mayor whos going to be there in the long term, Nassour said. We want to make sure the mayor is going to be responsive to what we want as residents of the city despite the letter next to our name. Someone who is not in bed with the unions and someone who is not opportunistic. Someone who really truly knows the hardships of the city.

Although theyre hardly unified, Boston Republicans are the largely silent voting minority that may tip the scale in Tuesdays preliminary election.

Marcela Garca can be reached at marcela.garcia@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @marcela_elisa.

Read more:

Dont count out the Republican vote in the Boston mayoral election - The Boston Globe

Republicans like to say that theyre the party of small government and local control, but as with their claims to be the party of fiscal discipline, they often fail to follow through when it runs afoul of their other priorities or simply becomes politically inconvenient.

Weve seen this in recent years with a number of issues, when Republican-led state governments either impose additional restrictions on local governments or refuse to grant them additional flexibility to set policy as they see fit. Usually, when Republican-led governments intervene in this manner, they frame it as a matter of intervening to protect their constituents individual constitutional rights from being trampled by some local entity. While it might be nice to think that Republican politicians always have this noble intention when they run roughshod over local governments, there are a couple of problems with this argument.

The first is a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to say that something is unconstitutional. While we all have our own views of what should and should not be considered constitutional, until the issue is actually considered by the courts, thats simply a matter of opinion. The constitutionality of a particular governmental policy is settled by the courts after a legal challenge, not by the opinion of activists or politicians. While its perfectly valid for an elected official to oppose a policy because they think its unconstitutional, theyre not the ultimate arbiters of constitutionality: The courts are. If any government implements a policy that harms an individual, theyre free to challenge it in court and make their constitutional arguments there. Thankfully, as a constitutional republic, we have a well-established process to do that in this country. Anyone who depends on politicians to protect their own individual liberties is bound to be sorely disappointed.

Another issue with this approach is that it essentially short-circuits the democratic process at the local level. When local governments make policy, their own constituents have every opportunity to have their voices heard throughout the process. If a decision is made by elected officials, citizens can appeal to them directly to reverse or modify the policy. If that fails, in many jurisdictions they may take it to the ballot box via a referendum campaign and overturn it themselves. If thats not available as an option, they can always use it as an issue in the next election in order to oust the local elected official(s) and reverse that decision. This isnt simply a theoretical process: Weve seen it play out time and time again in Maine. Selectmen and school board members have lost re-election because they dismissed staff without adequate explanation or implemented some controversial policy. These same opportunities exist during, and after, an emergency like the current pandemic.

So, the usual explanations for Republicans to intervene in local governing are little more than excuses: Theyre not the only option for people to have their voices heard or have their rights protected. Instead, as is often the case in politics, in fact the opposite is true. If a state government restricts a local government on a constitutional basis, its often because they dont think the courts are likely to side with their position. Theyre also probably not intervening because they have a lack of faith in the local democratic process, but because they know their supporters are unlikely to prevail at the local level. For the most part, these explanations are little more than bad-faith justifications for policy based on ideology designed to appeal to one partys base.

In the course of ordinary events, that would merely make for justifiable charges of hypocrisy that could be debated throughout the next campaign. During an emergency, though, hamstringing the ability of local governments to effectively respond could be a matter of life and death. Weve seen this during the pandemic, when Republican states have restricted or attempted to restrict local governments from imposing measure that may well be necessary for public safety.

The continued importance of local control during an emergency goes in both directions: Just as urban areas in Republican-led states may need more restrictions, rural areas in Democratic-led states may need far fewer. Our federalist constitutional principles shouldnt be abandoned during a crisis, but neither should a particular ideology be elevated over legitimate public safety concerns. The response to any emergency ought to be a practical matter, rather than becoming yet another issue thats the subject of partisan political debate.

Jim Fossel, a conservative activist from Gardiner, worked for Sen. Susan Collins.He can be contacted at:[emailprotected]Twitter:@jimfossel

Invalid username/password.

Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

Previous

Next

See more here:

Jim Fossel: Republicans should be the party of local control - Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel

According to one of Mr. Ahmadis passengers, a colleague who regularly commuted with him, the ride home was filled with their usual laughing and banter, but with one difference: Mr. Ahmadi kept the radio silent, as he was afraid of getting in trouble with the Taliban. He liked happy music, the colleague said. That day, we couldnt play any in the car.

Mr. Ahmadi dropped off his three passengers, and then headed for his home near the airport. I asked him to come in for a bit, but he said he was tired, the last passenger said.

Although U.S. officials said that at that point they still knew little about Mr. Ahmadis identity, they had become convinced that the white sedan he was driving posed an imminent threat to troops at the airport.

When Mr. Ahmadi pulled into the courtyard of his home which officials said was different than the alleged ISIS safe house the tactical commander made the decision to strike his vehicle, launching a Hellfire missile at around 4:50 p.m.

Although the target was now inside a densely populated residential area, the drone operator quickly scanned and saw only a single adult male greeting the vehicle, and therefore assessed with reasonable certainty that no women, children or noncombatants would be killed, U.S. officials said.

Read more:

Biden tells Republicans threatening to sue over vaccine mandate: Have at it as it happened - The Guardian

Earlier this month, House Minority LeaderKevin McCarthy responded to a demand by the committee for telecom companies topreserve records related to the attack by threatening retribution.

If these companies comply with the Democratorder to turn over private information, they are in violation of federal lawand subject to losing their ability to operate in the United States,McCarthy said in a statement posted to Twitter. More aggressively, he addedthat the Republican majority will not forget if the companies comply with themajority.

Other Republicans have made similar arguments, and a group of GOP lawmakers sought to try to counter the committees requestby demanding that social media and telecom companies preserve thecommunication and phone records of Democrat representatives for futureinvestigative usea request that doesnt relate in any serious way to January 6.

McCarthy and other congressional Republicans,including those the committee is reportedly seeking records for, have sincebeen arguing that the 30-some telecom companies that received the request arelegally obligated not to comply. That argument was called into question bylegal experts, though. In response to McCarthys argument that telecom companiesare required to protect the records the committee is asking for, former Federal Communications Commission Chair TomWheeler was among the many experts who said those laws dont apply here.

Follow this link:

January 6 Committee Tightens the Screws Despite Republican Warnings - The New Republic

Winning over the Ohio Republican Partyshouldn't be a tall task for Gov. Mike DeWine.

But the state party's66-member governing body will meet Friday without considering an endorsement for DeWine, Ohio's incumbent GOP governor running for reelection in 2022.

Instead, the Ohio Republican Party will consider endorsements for state supreme courtcontenders.The Ohio GOP could endorse DeWine at a future meeting their next one is set for December but some state central committee members frustrated withhow the governor handled COVID-19 are trying to block any endorsement.

Subscribe: Get a great deal on a full-access subscription

Strongsville GOPleader Shannon Burns said local Republicans don't want the state Republican party to endorse in "legitimate primary races," such as Ohio governor and U.S. Senate.

DeWinefaces a primary from former U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci and Canal Winchester farmer Joe Blystone. U.S. Rep. Warren Davidson, of Troy, is also considering a bid. The U.S. Senate race is an even more crowded primary.

More: In battling COVID-19, Gov. DeWine infuriated some fellow Republicans. What does that mean for reelection?

Endorsements have been a divisive topic among Republicans in recent years with some still bristling over the Ohio Republican Party's endorsement of then-Gov. John Kasich for president in 2016. Kasich lost the GOP primary to then-candidate Donald Trump despite winning one state: Ohio.

Renacci, who sought and won the Ohio GOP's endorsement for U.S. Senate in 2018, said he doesnt think anybody should endorse until candidates file officially and even then its up to the voters to make that decision, not the parties.

I believe the problem is any time the hand of the state central committee goes on top of endorsing somebody, what that does is give that individual additional resources and money and many Republicans in Ohio think thats wrong, Renacci said.

Renacci, who chairs Medina Countys GOP, said the state party should instead focus on supporting candidates to run and helping county party operations across the state.

The divide over DeWine was exacerbated by the Ohio Republican Party's $500,000 donation to the governor's reelection campaign. The party also donated money or in-kind services to the remaining GOP state officeholders.

Chairman Bob Paduchik explained the sum in an Aug. 11 letter to state central committee members: "ORP has a longstanding tradition of supporting incumbent Republican elected officials during their term of office."

Paduchik also wrote that any decision to endorse 2022 candidates would come from a majority vote of the governing body.

When might that decision come? I cant get into internal deliberations about a timeline," Ohio Republican Party spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said.

Clermont County Republican Party Chairman Greg Simpson said he wants the state party to endorse DeWine for reelection. He said endorsements can help GOPcandidates, and DeWine has done a good job under impossible circumstances.

"Theres no road map for what he had to do," Simpson said.

Mary Ann Christie, a central committee member and former Madeira mayor, said she would prefer for voters choose the primary winner and have the state party back that person.

"There shouldnt be any endorsements going on," she said.

USA TODAY Network Ohio bureau chief Jackie Borchardt contributed.

Jessie Balmert is a reporter for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Akron Beacon Journal, Cincinnati Enquirer, Columbus Dispatch and 18 other affiliated news organizations across Ohio.

Here is the original post:

Will the Ohio Republican Party endorse Gov. Mike DeWine's reelection bid? Not this week - The Cincinnati Enquirer

Snapshot of the moment: On the 20th anniversary of September 11, 2001, days after the president announced vaccination mandates intended to stop the 9/11-every-two-days death toll caused by the COVID pandemic, a Washington, D.C., rally planned for next Saturday celebrating people who invaded the Capitol Building and tried to overturn a free and fair election may become the flashpoint for further political violence because an astounding number of Republicans have been brought to believe Democrats are running a cannibal pedophile ring with Hollywood elites as part of a larger plot to take over the world.

Twenty years ago this morning, as I stood before a bank of televisions and watched the Twin Towers swaying in their death throes, I had a vision of what was to come. It was ridiculously incomplete, to be sure Nostradamus himself couldnt have pulled President Trump out of his hat but those events in combination with the people in power at that moment assured me we were headed for some very dark places.

Twenty years later, and all I can say is, I had no idea it would be like this. By this, I mean members of the very same Republican Party that pounced on 9/11 to wrap itself in the flag while attacking the Taliban and then Iraq has transmogrified into a pack of neo-Confederate would-be warriors, some of whom see the Talibans resurgence in Afghanistan as a model for future endeavors. The GOP was bad enough back then remember John Ashcroft shrouding the stone breasts of a statue so as not to be tempted, or something? but this new breed is thoroughly around the bend.

You cant blame it all on an economy that left them behind. A whole lot of these Republicans drive cars that cost more than your average three-bedroom house see: the gun-toting McMansion couple who got famous on the right-wing circuit for menacing peaceful protesters with an AR-15. What most of these people share in common is a frenzied terror that being white in America might be becoming less of a power ticket than it used to be, and hating Muslims 20 years ago has metastasized into hating everyone and everything that might threaten their centuries-old supremacy. Even you. Especially you.

If that includes disrupting and destroying elections, so be it. David Frum, the George W. Bush speechwriter who helped that Republican president sell fear to a traumatized nation, made an observation once. If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, he predicted, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.

It turns out Frum was only half right. They are rejecting democracy wholesale (see: Trumps Big Lie), but in their tumbledown rush to please a failed real estate mogul, they are also abandoning the flaccid strictures of basic conservatism. Look no further than Texas and Florida, where right-wing governors are dropping the hammer on local governments and small business over COVID mask mandates.

Im so old, I remember when local government and small business were the reasons conservatives claimed they existed in the first place. Now, they exist to please Trump, and have gone so far out into the ether that people like John McCain, Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, John Boehner and God-help-us even George W. Bush are considered to be too squishy-lefty to be tolerated in proper Republican circles.

All that, and they have foot-soldiers now, shock troops dressed in their finest tac gear and armed to the last tooth. These brigands are insinuating themselves into the ranks of anti-mask and anti-vax fanaticism, to the point that any school board meeting on these topics is likely to descend into a parking lot brawl, with fathers screaming at school board members, We will find you.

* * * * *

Flipping through the TV channels on Thursday night, I came across the first game of the NFL season. Someone was performing the national anthem, and I caught gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. The thought came of itself, immediate and unbidden Not in Afghanistan, not anymore and I fell down the stairwell of 20 years, again.

Thats been happening quite a bit lately, as this grim anniversary has lurked on the far side of news reports try to contain your shock about how our disastrous, useless, calamity war in that country came to a disastrous end. I mashed the buttons on the remote until some show about growing carrots came on, and I watched for a while in search of elusive calm; the very last thing I wanted to see was the God damned war machine flyover that has become a stinking staple of sporting events ever since the whole country went sideways into war, fear and failure.

Please clap, right? Twenty years, 20 miles of bad road, millions dead, damaged or displaced, trillions of dollars deftly handed to the fortunate few who sell the bullets and the bombs, criminal profiteers and their political enablers walking unencumbered in the daylight, hauling down small fortunes in speakers fees, and more again in fees for commentator gigs with the murderously complicit corporate news media.

All of it aftermath, the consequences of getting everything wrong since that day, and it has all only just begun, because a segment of the population spent 20 years bathing in far-right Republican Kool-aid the best stuff for fundraising, dontcha know and came out of the tub orange with rage, oblivious to the absurdities and the brazen picking of their pockets. Every time I see a vehicle with a Trump sticker next to an American flag sticker next to a Confederate flag sticker, a tiny part of my prefrontal lobe turns into pus and leaks out of my ear.

When did it start? Trump? The Tea Party? Newt Gingrich? Ronald Reagan? Richard Nixon? Barry Goldwater? Ayn Rand? Henry Ford? Appomattox? Wounded Knee? Jamestown? Cristbal Coln? From what bleak corner came the original sin that set us pinwheeling into this vortex of racism, greed, ignorance and violence?

Answer: Yes.

Upon this anniversary, I offer a dollop of purest truth to that cohort: Osama bin Laden and his friends got more than everything they came for 20 years ago, and you are the proof.

To the rest, I humbly proffer a bit of wisdom from Helen Keller: Rights are things which we get when we are strong enough to make our claim to them good.

To properly consecrate this day, endeavor to be stronger than those who seek to shred your rights out of a misguided fear that they are losing theirs. Quite an enormous amount depends on it.

Read the rest here:

20 Years After 9/11, Republicans Are the Greatest Threat to the United States - Truthout